Commercial insurance companies are marketing cyber risk policies with messages such as, “Just about any organization that uses technology to do business faces cyber risk.” In response to such risk, insurance companies are offering scores of “cyber” insurance products that get tweaked regularly and vary greatly in quality and terms. That lack of uniformity foretells coverage disputes – and litigation over insurance coverage for cyber claims began to emerge recently. Not all of the disputes, however, will reach the public eye as insurance companies have introduced arbitration provisions in their cyber policies. This session, led by Peter Halprin and Joshua Gold, explores a recent case highlighting the interplay between cyber insurance and arbitration, as well as what lawyers need to know about cyber insurance and arbitration.
Understand insurance responses to cyber claims including the products offered and the risks covered
Gain insight on coverage disputes regarding cyber claims
Identify how arbitration comes into play in these disputes and learn about a recent case involving the interplay of arbitration and cyber policies
Peter A. Halprin is a partner in Pasich LLP’s New York office. Peter represents commercial policyholders in complex insurance coverage matters with a focus on recovery strategies in relation to cyber crime, natural disasters, professional services, regulatory investigations, and technology disputes. Over the course of his career, Peter has arbitrated, litigated, and mediated claims involving a broad range of insurance policies and recovered hundreds of millions of dollars in insurance proceeds for policyholders.
Peter has advised clients regarding insurance coverage under an array of forms and policies including Boiler & Machinery, Builder’s Risk, Commercial Crime, Cyber, Directors & Officers (D&O), Employment Practices Liability (EPL), Errors & Omissions (E&O), Fidelity, General Liability (GL), Kidnap & Ransom (KKR), Media Liability, Pollution Legal Liability (PLL/EIL), Products Liability, Property, Technology E&O, Trade Credit, and Workers’ Compensation.
Peter also drafts coverage analyses and correspondence, and advises captive insurance companies regarding reinsurance recoveries. In this area, with a focus on health care and hospital professional liability programs, Peter has recovered over $200 million in reinsurance proceeds for captive insurance companies. He has also advised such companies in the design of claims adjustment and related alternative dispute resolution programs.
Peter acts as counsel for U.S. and foreign companies in domestic and international arbitrations, including both ad hoc (ARIAS, Bermuda Form, London) as well as institutional (AAA, ICC, ICDR, JAMS, LCIA) arbitration forums. He has served as both party-appointed and sole arbitrator, and is a Member of the AAA National Roster of Arbitrators.
Peter assisted in the drafting of the new ARIAS•U.S. Panel Rules for the Resolution of Insurance and Contract Disputes.
Joshua Gold is a shareholder in Anderson Kill's New York office. He has represented numerous corporate and non-profit policyholders in various industries, with recoveries for his clients well in excess of $1.5 billion. Mr. Gold is chair of the Cyber Insurance Recovery Practice Group. He is also co-chair of Anderson Kill's Financial Services Industry Group and a member of the firm's Hospitality Industry Group.
Mr. Gold's practice involves matters ranging from international arbitration, data security, directors and officers insurance, business income/property insurance, commercial crime insurance, admiralty, cargo, and marine insurance disputes. He has been lead trial counsel in multi-party bench and jury trials, and has negotiated and crafted scores of settlement agreements including coverage-in-place agreements.
Mr. Gold won a multi-million dollar recovery in a landmark U.S. Court of Appeals, Sixth Circuit decision, on behalf of a retailer that suffered a data breach as a result of a computer hacking scheme. In finding coverage for the retailer's losses stemming from the breach, the Sixth Circuit rejected the insurance company's "direct loss" defense, instead applying a proximate cause standard. Because the "direct loss" defense is commonly cited in such cases, the decision is of particular importance to businesses purchasing fidelity, crime and financial institution bond coverage.
Mr. Gold has a regular column in Risk Management Magazine and has been published in numerous business and legal periodicals, covering a variety of insurance, commercial and consumer issues. He has been quoted on insurance coverage issues in Forbes magazine, CFO magazine, Business Insurance, National Underwriter, Computerworld, Best’s Insurance Newsand various other trade and business periodicals catering to the risk management, computer, medical and technology professions. He is also an Adjunct Professor of Insurance Law at Brooklyn Law School.
Additionally, Mr. Gold is a frequent lecturer on insurance coverage issues, speaking at conferences nationwide and internationally, including conferences convened by the Risk and Insurance Management Society (RIMS), the Practicing Law Institute (PLI), the Chartered Property Casualty Underwriters Society (CPCU) and the College of Insurance, New York City.
This was more substantive than I thought it would be and important information.